NEHA Survey Presentation 2008

Analysis: A National Survey

of Environmental Health

Professionals

72nd Annual Educational Conference

National Environmental Health Association June 2008

Tucson, Arizona

Omar Keith Helferich, Ph.D.

M. Douglas Voss, Ph.D.

John E Griggs, Ph.D.

Presentation Outline

• Survey Background and Demographics

• Summary of Key Results

• Significant Response Differences by Categories

• Understanding Open-Ended Responses

• 5 Key Takeaways

• Recommendations

SURVEY FUNDING AND

PARTICIPATION

• Department of Homeland Security

•National Center for Food Protection and Defense

•University of Minnesota

• Michigan State University

•Griggs and Associates

• National Environmental Health Association

DEMOGRAPHICS

• Current Position

• Years of Experience

• Registered Sanitarian or EH Professional

• Professional Classification

• Emergency Experience

• Population of Geographic Jurisdiction

• NEHA Region

Respondents

0

50

100

150

200

250

City, County, State Uniformed

Number of Respondents by Group

Years of Experience

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

< than 5 5 to 9 > than 20 15 to 19 10 to 14

Years of Experience

Professional Status

0

50

100

150

200

250

Yes No

Registered Sanitarian or EH Specialist

Job Classification

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Job Classification

Self Rating: Specific Hazards / Incident

Experience

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Self Rating Hazards Covered/Level of Experience

Population of Area Served

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

250,000 andabove

100,001 to250,000

50,001 to100,000

25,001 to50,000

Under 25,000

Population of Geographic Jurisdiction

Respondents by Region

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Respondents by Region

SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS

• Hazard Area Importance

• NRP and NIMS

• Preparedness and Response

• Agency Needs

• Challenges Faced

• Collaboration Needs

Hazard Area Importance - Mean

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Mean Response

What do EH professionals feel is the most important hazard area in which they should expend limited resources? Rank 1 to 7.

Familiarity with NRP

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Familiarity with NRP

(My) familiarity with NRP.

Familiarity with NIMS

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Familiarity with NIMS

(My) familiarity with NIMS

Our Agency’s All Hazards Plan has…

Written Clear Roles Tested Evaluated Technology toSupport

5 7 14 11 9

83

47 44 41 35

21

52 49 52

63

12

36 34 40

52

126

107 107 103

90

Agreement with Statements About Plan

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Agree

We Must Communicate Better With…

With PH Organizations With Non-PH Organizations

1 2

98

130

46

22

10 2

93 92

Need Improved Communication…

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Agree

SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS

• Hazard Area Importance

• NRP and NIMS

• Preparedness and Response

• Agency Needs

• Challenges Faced

• Collaboration Needs

Knowledge and Skills Needed for All

Hazards Preparedness and Response

Rank Need Mean

Response

1 Additional formal training and drills across EH jurisdictions 1.633

1

Formal training and drills with other government incident response

agencies 1.643

1

Additional formal training and drills with other agencies in my

jurisdiction 1.677

2 Increased human resource staffing and funding 1.762

2 Formal training and drills with private organizations 1.807

2

Improved use of technology for infield inspections and sharing of

results 1.862

3

Formal written definitions of EH inspection and assessment

methods 1.895

3 Improved documented procedures and guidelines 1.914

3

Greater understanding of the National Incident Management System

(NIMS) 1.995

4 Greater understanding of the National Response Plan (NRP) 2.068

What is most needed to ensure preparedness for All-Hazard Incidents?

Greatest Challenges Faced by Our Agency

for Preparedness

Rank Challenge Mean

Response

1 Acquiring additional funding for EH staffing 1.682

2 Achieving adequate funding for tools and technology 1.889

3

Identification of required competencies and delivering training at

the local level 2.056

3

The lack of coordinated efforts among the many response agencies

(e.g. law enforcement, fire, health, and other non-profit) 2.134

3 The lack of appropriate tools and assessment methods 2.247

3 The lack of registered sanitarians 2.336

3

Acceptance and integration of EH roles within the Federal Incident

Command System (ICS) infrastructure 2.336

What are the greatest challenges to EH agencies in All Hazards incident preparedness?

Greatest Challenges Faced by Our Agency

for Response

Rank Challenge Mean

Response

1 A lack of inspection results shared in a timely manner 2.862

2 A lack of accurate inspection results 3.209

What are the greatest challenges to EH agencies in All Hazards incident response?

Agreement that a written All Hazards plan

exists… by job classification

Rank Professional Classification Response Mean

1 Supervisor 1.594

1 Technician 1.667

1 Director 1.667

1 Other 1.813

2 Manager 2.043

2 Senior Sanitarian 2.057

5 Sanitarian 2.096

Agreement the All Hazards plan clearly

defines the EH role… by job classification

Rank Professional Classification Response

Mean

1 Director 1.979

1 Technician 2.000

1 Supervisor 2.219

1 Manager 2.457

5 Other 2.500

5 Sanitarian 2.558


Agreement that the All Hazards plan is

formally evaluated… by job classification


Mean

1 Supervisor 2.031

1 Director 2.125

1 Technician 2.333

2 Manager 2.600

2 Other 2.688

5 Sanitarian 2.742


Need to communicate EH role outside of

public health… by job classification


Mean


1 Other 1.500

1 Director 1.583

1 Supervisor 1.656

1 Manager 1.667

2 Sanitarian 1.731

5 Technician 2.667

Differences for increased human resource

staffing/funding… by job classification


Mean

1 Other 1.438

1 Director 1.521

1 Supervisor 1.524

1 Technician 1.667

1 Manager 1.826


5 Sanitarian 1.995

Differences in ranking most important hazard

areas… by size of jurisdiction

Water Supply

Rank Population Response Mean

1 Under 25,000 1.538

1 100,001 to 250,000 1.882

1 50,001 to 100,000 2.264

5 250,000 and above 2.572

5 25,001 to 50,000 2.677

Waste Water


1 100,001 to 250,000 3.906

1 Under 25,000 3.950

1 250,000 and above 4.228

1 50,001 to 100,000 4.423

5 25,001 to 50,000 4.798

Differences in belief that EH roles are

clearly defined… by size of jurisdiction


1 Under 25,000 1.769

1 100,001 to 250,000 2.224

1 50,001 to 100,000 2.300

5 250,000 and above 2.482

5 25,001 to 50,000 2.933

Improved documented procedures &

guidelines needed… by size of jurisdiction


1 50,001 to 100,000 1.767

1 250,000 and above 1.778

2 25,001 to 50,000 2.033

2 100,001 to 250,000 2.054

5 Under 25,000 2.308

Need greater understanding of NIMS for

preparedness… by years of experience

Rank Years of Experience Response Mean

1 > 20 1.82

1 15 to 19 1.85

1 10 to 14 1/93

5 5 to 9 2.12

5 < 5 2.22

OPEN-ENDED RESPONSES

•What else should we be doing?

•Where are our greatest opportunities to improve preparedness?

Express views and opinions…

• Are there other areas in which you feel your

EH agency should be involved?

• Where are the greatest opportunities to

improve public health all-hazards

preparedness within the next two years?

Other areas for EH agency involvement

1. 42% of respondents indicated the need to focus

on specific threats (e.g., CBRNE, HAZMAT, Disease)

2. 32% indicated a need to assist in response to any

disaster; with focus on post-disaster housing,

shelter, clinical services, sanitation, and animal

related issues

3. Others cited EHP role clarification and the need

for collaboration and public education, planning,

and training

Greatest opportunities to improve

preparedness in the next 2 years?

1. 30% of respondents indicated that collaboration

provides the greatest opportunity... coordination,

joint-planning/training, and public-private

partnerships

2. 24% believed training is a significant opportunity

3. 20% cited the need to clarify EHP’s role

4. Others cited the need for funding, planning and

process improvements, better tools, and better

use of volunteers

5 KEY TAKEAWAYS

5 Key takeaways

1. Leadership must work to clarify the role of the

EHP

2. Must collaborate with other EHP’s and other

public/private parties

3. Must focus on specific threats in planning and

training

4. In the event of an incident, EHPs should lead in

efforts to coordinate provision of food, shelter,

medicine

5. Incident preparedness and response are key

EHP activities… tools, funding, staff, and training

are needed to efficiently and effectively perform

these activities in addition to primary activities.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Formally Define the Role

of Environmental Health

Agencies in responding

to All Hazards

Develop a Plan to Lead

efforts to coordinate the

provision of food,

shelter, medicine and

other needs of the public

Implement a program to

communicate the EH role

Initiate a plan to increase

collaboration and training across

public and private agencies

Define the role of Environmental

Health in more rapidly identifying

contamination sources and at-risk

food purchase and consumption

sites.

Recommended for Consideration

•

Develop Standards for Critical

Needs for All Hazards EH Response

Plan

Initiate program to increase access

to funding for staffing and agency

tools\technology

Expand program for collaboration,

training and drills across agencies

and industry

Resurvey EH Professionals to

track changing opinions

Recommended for Consideration

CONTACT INFORMATION

Contacts

• Omar Keith Helferich, Ph.D.

– Supply Chain Sustainability LLC

– e-mail: [email protected]

• M. Douglas Voss, Ph.D.

– University of Central Arkansas

– E-mail: [email protected]

• John E Griggs, Ph.D.

– Supply Chain Sustainability LLC

– e-mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



NEHA Survey Presentation 2008

Documents

Transcript of NEHA Survey Presentation 2008